tv Washington Journal Viewer Calls CSPAN April 17, 2017 9:33am-10:04am EDT
to stand up when we decide to make an action, we'll follow through with it and make sure think known and i don't we will be shy about the values of america. >> thursday 8 p.m. eastern, continue with personal profiles of president trump's tom et, including devos, price, ben carson and scott pruitt. and ates join together enter an agreement to address water quality issue and involve it's to serve the role supposed to serve, should be commended and celebrated. eastern, mariah shriverand physicians discuss alzheimers disease. >> studying women could lead to us. cure for all of >> this week 8 p.m. on c-span. >> "washington journal" continues. host: in our last 30 minutes morning, we're asking hould churches be allowed to
are tax exempt, i believe strongly they should be totally from any involvement with state activities. host: why is that, nance sne why feel that way? caller: i don't think they tax-exempt, they use municipal facilities like any place does. i don't think that is their job, not to create political decisions in the church, place worship. host: does tax status matter if away the tax exempt matter what it churches do? caller: yes, somewhat, they become equal partner with other business, i wouldn't go to candidate endorsed and churches are failing in this country, if they want to lose think nt members, then i that is good way to do it. host: tom up next in missouri in
elbury, independent, good morning, tom. good morning. host: go ahead. good morning, go ahead. yeah, no sh,going on, money for their lay grounds and stuff out of public money, i believe they will take public money, should give public money. church leaders within the church. public money, i believe they will take public money, should give caller: pretty much what they do right now. may not directly use candidate name, they use planned parenthood here in missouri, with awful lies that, is exactly why they should not be. host: mark, republican, good morning. caller: thank you very much for to speak.e i believe strongly in the
separation of church and state. of the strengths of our union and i don't believe religious worship has any place in politics. that is my statement. host: mark, what do you think caller's last statement, it happens anyway right now? caller: no doubt he is correct. told me friend that he's definitely felt when he of ted mass that because abortion position of the two candidates, they definitely were saying to vote for president trump. host: oura in robstown, texas, morning. caller: good morning. like to thank you first, for being able to state on your on c-span. i agree with most -- almost all
the callers, because i believe separation of church and tate and they could be out there with all the other politicians and all that. because they should pay taxes you.all of us, thank caller: more from the "washington post" story on the being included in tax reform. the aim of repealing the johnson mendment is not universally embraced by all religious groups, coalition of 99 jewish tions including and baptist groups sent a letter last week that urged the ban to statement on a thursday, senator rob widen, ranking democrat in the senate spoke out mittee against the efforts to eliminate joh johnson amendment, institutions, increase flow of dark monnepolitics and force bill for to foot the special interest. the story noting jerry falwell christian leader and president of liberty university
aid concern are overblown saying repeal account be fairfully crafted, churches and tax-exempt organizations permitted to spend small percentage of funds to support candidates. we are asking should churches endorse a candidate? be allowed to get involved in political activity necessary to george jacksonville, florida, good morning. caller: good morning. i am actual ly don't agree with so the comments that i heard far. the idea of separation of church state must be to include of mosques and and synagogues and state f. we just finance christian and other religions to be to , i have been listening
in the mosques nd the rabbi preaching in the synagogue, the emom is always very political and the same as the rabbi talking and support of israel and whatever. host: let me clarify, the talking mendment we're about being repealed here applies to all tax-exempt groups, not just hurches, masks and synagogues, which the i.r.s. bars from endorsing candidates and getting involved in political campaigns because churches fall under of the tax code, it applies to them and to the asks and synagogues that are tax-exempt, as well. -- er: yeah, but my conversation -- ost: you think they do it anyway? caller: no, my conversation is
or t a church sponsoring only ing a candidate, can difference if a mosque will stop endorsing or synagogue stop endorsing jewish candidate. host: all right, got your point. tonya in big harbor, washington. tonya, good morning? you?r: how are host: doing well. caller: i do not think it should at all.sed for one, think about it, pastors churches and very easily can pay parishioners to side or the other. i recently left a church due to that republican. happened? caller: he started talking about political political ramifications and the became divided. it was sad. the thing he was preaching, you
got to do this and that and he trump, for trump. you know, it is like, wow, really? you can't do that. going to say the name of the church, either, but it was just a sad thing. know, he was talking about, you know, if you vote this way he for some weird reason brought in, if you have cancer and stuff like that, that is one sinful ecause you are and it just is sad, you know. the bible, jesus didn't even get involved in away from e walked it. realistically, it just, you vote people themselves can outside the church, they don't eed parishioner, the pastors telling them this or that, the pastors themselves have to stay all situationsst because otherwise it is like the you tell a child, if your child something, a lot of them will believe it, they get older and know better. host: special line for religious
leader necessary this segment of the "washington journal." from you on this possible repeal of the johnson amendment, 202-748-2003. wife of a pastor in south carolina, angela, good morning. you today? are host: doing well. caller: i just wanted to say and i can speak for my husband at this point, churches allowed to endorse any candidate. however, i want to say, further, where the real issue lies. i don't think reverends or type of faith y should be allowed to endorse a candidate. mean they does not have to be the leader of a church, i'm speaking for my as an individual person, for people to know him to be reverend. reverend ng about jesse jackson, al sharpton, all f them are ministers of their
faith. and as previous caller was sway over y can hold individual people, i will not say all parishioners, but ertain individual people are more able to be influenced by others or easily influenced and it doesn't matter if they are in home church, small town in south carolina or running giant owns, they their need to keep their opinion about political candidates to themselves. host: angela, it was ever tough for your husband in the past election to do that? was there a time that he wanted to say something and struggled with this? caller: no. he didn't. i will be honest to tell you, is not my nt trump husband or my own first choice, choice or ce, third even our fourth choice for a president of the united states. not struggle with that. he generally does not struggle with anything like that. he believe its is up to an individual person to use choose, their morals that
they get from their faith. whomever it is they choose to worship. on is for them to decide their own as they look at the issues, issues that concern their family and what they believe is best for the country. host: thanks for the call from south carolina. 15 minutes left on this easter this , we're end withing question. should churches and other tax religious institutions be allowed to endorse candidates? get in politics, episilom, democrat, good morning. caller: yes. earthly kingdom, my eeling is that if the churches want to be able to have their representative speak out in candidates, then they should lose their tax-exempt status. remember, itpoint, is not just tax-exemption, they don't play into unemployment fund and other funds.
they should lose their status functions as any other corporation would do. property s subject to taxes and other taxes. thank you. ost: has it ever happened to the church that you have been to, that a religious leader endorsed a candidate or anyone in terms of politic? caller: no, my pastor does just that.posite of he will not support a candidate. host: thanks for the call. note on easter monday that the white house easter egg roll is has been underway for little over two hours this morning over at the white house side of her pennsylvania avenue here in washington, d.c. to ident trump expected appear at that event, 10:30 this morning. florida, line for republicans, good morning. caller: good morning. ahead, william.
caller: i would like to throw one thing into the mix. endorsement, what spoke t be like if emom against radicalism or pope spoke nazi-ism? like to throw that into the mix, that you for asking question of you and your listeners? want to know ou about it? caller: opposite of endorse don't wantying no, i my people to do this. endorsement is the exact flip this, is evil.no >> do you think they should be able to call out political they s more for things disagree with? caller: i believe it is people, they should , ll against evil or injustice
and so the opposite side, should to endorse someone? host: when does it cross the evil and ing out injustice to political speech that is inappropriate by leader?s caller: i'm sorry, maybe that is ver my pay grade, that is why i'm asking you and the other callers. host: i appreciate you bringing it up. leader in dillon, south carolina. tom, good morning. caller: hi. ahead, tom. caller: yeah. me personally, i believe church right to speak any anything they want to for sitting ct is, you there all the time, you don't about ople talk separation of state, we're one nation under god, man, everybody should have their right to free speech. i don't think because of tax exemption the churches should be that.eld from host: tom, religious leader, how congregation?
how big is your congregation, are calling in on the line for religious leaders. people. about 80 host: how often does politics come up for you? caller: it comes up since i've a child, growing up in lot.ch, it comes up a host: and so give an example from the past couple weeks of it congregation.our calle -- er: host: i think we lost tom. rystal, holt, michigan, good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. opinion o my personal is that any kind of 501c3 organization, religious, whatever, should be allowed to state their opinion freedom of speech. i don't think they should be ble to financially contribute to any particular candidate. host: that would be the line, say what they want from the pulpit, but don't make it
financial? caller: right. i give moneyw when charitable h or to a organization, i want my money to go help the cause they are supporting. is specifically a political candidate, i expect to use that political candidate. if going to homeless shelter, i don't want the homeless shelter say, we will give it to this person, i want it to go to the homeless. be used e funds to appropriately. host: how do you feel about a pastor standing up at the pulpit and saying, you need to donate to candidate x, because that is who i believe is right person for this job? a ler: i think that would be bad decision on that pastor's choice. i don't believe the whole their ation should lose status, their 501c3 status ecause of the pastor endorsing a specific candidate. host: what if it is a one-pastor church?
caller: i think, well -- i guess up to -- whoever the other leaders of that church pastor, not to be fundraising for another organization. crystal, appreciate the call from michigan. campbellsburg, an independent. good morning. john, the , constitution is supreme law of according to article 7. and every law enforcement every military person, take an oath to uphold and defend it. the first amendment to the bill rights says congress shall pass no law with respect to five freedoms, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freshmen the press, of assembly and freedom to file
the ances, how can government enforce a law which cannot be made? the johnson nk amendment should have never been place, nted in the first bob? caller: it's unconstitutional. if the congress is prohibited legislating that, how can hey possibly be executed or judged? host: more from the "washington article, the latest on the issue from the white house, the eporter john wagner with "washington post," noting white strawspokeswoman natalie said trump supports repeal of but will not -- bundling approach as part of tax kevin brady of texas, chairman of the ways and means
committee. noting ralph read, repeal of the as top amendment priorities he is not concerned with how the repeal happens as he is that trump and other keep their promise to repeal it. oday's "washington post," gop provision allow tax-exempt groups to back candidates, that about for re talking the last six minutes on the washington journal. arbara, pittsburgh, pennsylvania, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. say that i do not johnson agree with the law, i do not think that ministers should be llowed to support a candidate -- art of their ministry or need to focus on ethics and and not only that, we
have the freedom to practice religion. of speech.freedom and i don't believe any religion you that. that comes from your own foundation and your own personal what you are as a want toing and what you see carried out in our country. we're here to practice religion, whenever we want, nobody interferes with that, but i believe that a minister or religious any other person should use their pulpit their faith to get church goers to vote as they see fit or make them use, allow them to this person ay for to manipulate, you know, if you are really this good of a person, then you will
vote this way. ifeel strongly about that and thank you for the ability to say so. in morrisville, north carolina, an independent. good morning. you doing? i really want to give kudos to pastor's wife in south southern state. go to worship or whatever, you go to be taught good and nd how to be directions in your life on making decisions in your life and the other at thing this, is all thingos your own, no matter what thing, you going there to have -- sit or holy man or and tell you exactly, you know, make.decision to that is left up to the individual after you learn from or the koran, or
whatever your faith is. this, the country you church and s government. do s think about countries, you want iranium government in ours, you know, directing the people that make decisions, i don't. mean, and then too, like religion ferson said, or something like that, or without it, still an american. choose not to worship and that is -- i feel that, you times you say awe are atheist in this country, you shunned. you can get persecution from believe.o do to believe the right in anything you want that, makes our country great, it seriously a great place. freedom of thought.
you can't have that, if you're sitting and listening to one person's thought and who they and that is both sides. so that is the way i feel. johnson, er in pennsylvania. line for republicans, good morning. yes.er: hello. hi. interesting y question here because at be able to uld advocate for any position what thesoever, there should be no sensorship at all from the for churches, however, the money is a question. so money cannot be used for purposes tax free. o that proves that money and hat means that the decision by the supreme court to identify those two is completely baseless groundless.
i would like to see a test case made to bring this to the court.e see what the -- finally come to on the separation of church and state tis really separation of money and state. money and church and state, not freedom of speech and freedom of state.n and host: thanks for the call. roger, our last caller in "washington journal," we'll be back tomorrow morning at 7 a.m. eastern, 4 a.m. pacific. in the meantime, have a great easter monday.
>> on this eastern monday morning, we are looking live at house, an of the white national tradition going back to the 1970's the 1870's, and easter payroll. first lady melania trump and president trump posted. we will have live coverage of more if this coming up at 10:30 eastern. part of our live coverage also includes a discussion looking at russia's foreign policy, its relationship with the united states and europe, and whether russian interests will be more adversarial to the west in the future. that is live, coming up at 12:30, at the center for the national interest. we will be back at the white house midafternoon for the white house briefing with sean spicer, scheduled for 2:00 p.m. eastern.
tonight, starting at 8:00 eastern, events with senior officials from the obama administration. first, senior adviser valerie jarrett speaking at the city club of chicago, followed by loretta lynch at harvard law school. here is a preview. >> how close did you come when president obama gave up his senate seat? >> i knew you were going there. >> it is city club. we always like to program find certain things out. how close did you come to making a decision to strike out for that seat? and you were quoted as saying the obamas sort of dissuaded you. would you talk to that, please? valerie: why not? just us, right? of your closest friends. valerie: and whoever is watching on tv. susan and i did talk about it last week.
i talk seriously about throwing my hat in the ring. my family and closest friends were all supportive of it, and they thought it would be great to be a u.s. senator a legislator, a principal, and do my own thing. they were all for it. and what the president ultimately said was, i know you. i know the senate, because i have been there. and i know what i want to build in the white house, and i think you will enjoy the executive ranch more, and you will feel as though your impact could be greater in the executive ranch, with the portfolio you described, issues i cared passionately about for a very long time, compared to joining the senate. and boy, was he right. i am very glad i did not join the senate. for those who did work in the senate or the house over the last eight years, it is extremely frustrating. the way, that program coming up tonight at 8:00 eastern here on c-span. the annual white house easter getting underway on the south lawn.
press secretary sean spicer posing with the easter bunny. this tweet from the white house press office. the first lady's communication director tweeted out this pic sure of the press secretary greeting kids on the white house lawn in an area called the reading milk. the president and first lady melania trump hosting today's easter egg role. we will have coverage at 10:30 eastern. in the meantime, we will take a look back at white house easter egg roles hosted by the last four presidents. the menus to take place on capitol hill until congress worried about damaged to the capitol grounds and passed a law banning the practice. two years later, president rutherford b. hayes opened the grounds to children on easter. -- easter monday. [indiscernible]